Schedule Thinning Following Functional Communication Training: Effects of Chained and Multiple Schedules

Functional communication training (FCT) is used to reduce rates of problem behavior by teaching communicative responses that access functionally equivalent reinforcers. During FCT, the communicative response is typically placed on a dense schedule of reinforcement that is unlikely to be maintained in the natural environment. Experiment 1 evaluated the effects of two schedule-thinning procedures (chained schedules and multiple schedules) on problem behavior maintained by escape from demands for three participants following FCT. The chained and multiple-schedule procedures were effective in reducing rates of problem behavior. Compliance increased under both schedules, but the chained schedule resulted in higher levels of compliance with two participants. In Experiment 2, participants’ preference for the chained or multiple-schedule procedure was evaluated using a modified concurrent-chain procedure. One participant preferred the chained schedule. One participant preferred the multiple schedule. One participant did not appear to discriminate between conditions.

Further Evaluation of a Practitioner Model for Increasing Eye Contact in Children With Autism

Cook et al. recently described a progressive model for teaching children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) to provide eye contact with an instructor following a name call. The model included the following phases: contingent praise only, contingent edibles plus praise, stimulus prompts plus contingent edibles and praise, contingent video and praise, schedule thinning, generalization assessments, and maintenance evaluations. In the present study, we evaluated the extent to which modifications to the model were needed to train 15 children with ASD to engage in eye contact. Results show that 11 of 15 participants acquired eye contact with the progressive model; however, eight participants required one or more procedural modifications to the model to acquire eye contact. In addition, the four participants who did not acquire eye contact received one or more modifications. Results also show that participants who acquired eye contact with or without modifications continued to display high levels of the behavior during follow-up probes. We discuss directions for future research with and limitations of this progressive model.